April 1, 1990 / Vol. 15, No.

7 / OPTICS LETTERS 363

Wavelength-division multiplexing and demultiplexing on locally

sensitized single-mode polymer microstructure waveguides
Michael R. Wang, Ray T. Chen, G. J. Sonek, and Tomasz Jannson
Physical Optics Corporation, 2545West 237th Street, Torrance, California 90505

Received November 14, 1989; accepted January 25, 1990

A four-channel wavelength-division-(de)multiplexing [WD(D)M] device, operating over optical wavelengths of

543.0 to 632.8 nm, has been successfully fabricated on newly developed locally sensitized polymer (photo-lime
gelatin) microstructure waveguides (PMSW's). The WD(D)M device exhibits a cross talk of less than -40 dB
between adjacent channels and a diffraction efficiencyof better than 50%. The angular and spectral bandwidths for
the device are 0.2-0.4° and -4-10 nm, respectively. Such sensitivities can significantly increase the WD(D)M
channel density for optical interconnect architectures. Since the PMSW device can be constructed on a variety of
substrates, including insulators, semiconductors, conductors, and ceramics, the demultiplexing technique that we
report is suitable for use in a variety of optical-computing, signal-processing, and communication applications.

Wavelength-division (de)multiplexing [WD(D)M] is
considered to be a key technology for enhancing the
transmission capacity and the application flexibility
of optical communication and sensor systems. Vari-
ous types of wavelength-division multiplexers and de-
multiplexers have been proposed and demonstrated,
including prism, interference filter, and diffraction
grating devices.1"2 In comparison with other
WD(D)M devices, grating demultiplexers in thin-film
waveguides3 - 6 can exhibit high efficiencies, sharp
wavelength selectivities, and large channel densities,
making them highly suitable for monolithic integra-
tion with photodetectors in, for example, the construc-
tion of integrated-optic WD(D)M receiver termi-
nals.5 ' 6
In this Letter we report, for the first time to our
knowledge, the development of a four-channel inte-
grated-optic wavelength-division demultiplexer, using
multiplexed waveguide holographic gratings pat-
terned on a locally sensitized single-mode polymer
(photo-lime gelatin) microstructure waveguide
(PMSW). The device makes use of the fact that the
refractive-index profile of the polymer can be tuned by
means of mass density changes during wet and dry
processing.7 The creation of a graded-index profile
with a high surface index thereby facilitates low-loss
(<1-dB/cm) waveguide formation on substrates, such
as GaAs, LiNbO 3 , alumina (A12 0 3), and beryllium ox-
ide (BeO),7' 8 that would otherwise exhibit excessive
The demultiplexer was formed using a two-step pro-
cess. First, a single-mode planar polymer waveguide
was formed on top of an appropriate substrate. In
this case, a thin layer (-3.0 gm) of photo-lime gelatin
was coated on a soda-lime glass sample. After wave-
guide index profile tuning and film hardening,7 the
waveguide was tested, using the prism coupling meth-
od. Single-mode propagation was confirmed for opti-
cal wavelengths over the range of 543.0-632.8 nm.
Second, holographic gratings were selectively de-
fined within the sensitized polymer microstructure
waveguide region. To accomplish this, a layer of pho-
toresist was spin coated on top of the PMSW. Stan-
dard photolithography was then used to create an op-
tical window for local sensitization. The local sensiti-
zation process was achieved by dipping the sample
into an ammonium dichromate solution at room tem-
perature. The masking material was then removed,
and within 2 h after drying and stabilization of the
sensitized region the sample was ready for dichromat-
ed gelatin (DCG) holographic recording and process-
ing.
In order to form the multiplexed waveguide holo-
A~~~~~~~~~~~

loss or leaky-mode behavior. In addition, the polymer

waveguide is optically transparent from 300 to 2700
nm, making the polymer-based WD(D)M device de-
scribed herein suitable for operation at infrared wave-
lengths in communication applications. WAVEGUIDE
A schematic of the basic waveguide phase hologram
demultiplexer is shown in Fig. 1. A guided mode, X t | SUBSTRATE
having wave vector kg in the polymer waveguide, is
incident upon a slanted phase grating, of wave vector DCG GRATING
K, that has been selectively defined over a given dis-
tance d. The actual WD(D)M device, with a grating Fig. 1. Model of the polymer microstructure waveguide,
length of d = 0.5 mm and Bragg diffraction angles with selectively defined DCG phase gratings having slanted
between 250 and 550, was fabricated on a PMSW. fringes.

0146-9592/90/070363-03$2.00/0 © 1990 Optical Society of America

364 OPTICS LETTERS / Vol. 15, No. 7 / April 1, 1990

action with other existing gratings or from random

632.8rnm efficiency for closely spaced channels. The angular
611.9nm
_ x I_ = ~~~~~~~~~~~~~594.1
nm
Fig. 2. Four-channel wavelength-division-demultiplexer
device using a PMSW waveguide. The diffracted wave-
lengths are 632.8, 611.9, 594.1, and 543.0 nm.
graphic gratings, to be used in demultiplexing the sig-
nal carriers of different wavelengths, a two-beam in-
terference recording method was employed. Each in-
dividual holographic grating, having a sinusoidal
phase-modulation profile, is recorded such that
fluctuations in grating modulation index and wave-
guide thickness, will limit the overall WD(D)M device
and spectral sensitivities for the present device were
determined to be 0.2-0.4° and approximately 4-10
nm, respectively.
The above results can be compared with values cal;
culated by using coupled-mode theory, as it is applied
to a lossless step-index waveguide medium containing
slanted phase gratings.9 The TE-mode (p-light) dif-
fraction efficiency is shown in Fig. 3 as a function of
Bragg angle and wavelength. For the calculation it
was assumed that there is complete overlap between
the guided mode and the index perturbation and that
the modulation index has a value of An = 0.01. The
diffraction angles chosen for study correspond to
those used in actual WD(D)M device described above.
We note that the effects of a finite beam width and a
graded-index profile were not accounted for in the
1.0

Ki = 2kxi sin 2 ) (1)

0.8
U
where kxi and Ki are defined as z
LUi

kx, = Neffi 27 (2a) 0

z
0
2iA
LU
Lt

Here is is the angle of Bragg diffraction, Ai is the ith 0.2

holographic grating period, Ki is the ith grating wave
vector, and NeffA.is the waveguide mode effective
0.0
index at Xi. Since the effective index Neff of the 0. 0.628 0.632 0.6;
WAVFLENGTH (prn)
PMSW is a function of the wavelength, different re-
cording angles were selected for each different carrier Fig. 3. Diffraction efficiency and wavelength dependence
wavelength in order to satisfy the necessary phase- as a function of the diffraction angle At. A mode effective
matching conditions of each wavelength. Exposure index Neff = 1.5172, a center wavelength of X = 0.6328 Atm,an
parameters were adjusted during successive holo- index modulation An = 0.01,and a grating interaction length
graphic recordings in an attempt to optimize diffrac- d = 0.5 mm were used in the calculations.
tion efficiencies. Each grating is, therefore, designed
to be capable of deflecting only one wavelength within
a 4-10-nm spectral bandwidth. 1.4-
The resultant four-channel WD(D)M device, fabri- 65°
cated on a locally sensitized PMSW and operating at X 1.2-
= 632.8 nm (red), 611.9 nm (orange), 594.1 nm (yel- 1s
-6.00 0
low), and 543.0 nm (green), is shown in Fig. 2. For
each wavelength, the TEOguided mode is excited by 0.8
prism coupling into the PMSW structure at a distance L)
of approximately 2-4 mm from the grating interaction it 0.6
I
-4.00
0
region. The cross talk of each individual channel was t)0.

measured to be approximately -40 dB, while the dif- 0

0.62
fraction efficiency at each wavelength was found to be -2.00 a~
LUi
M
higher than 50%. It should be possible to achieve D
much higher diffraction efficiencies for each individ- 2'

ual grating if the grating-index modulation profile and 0.0 4-

the grating interaction length are optimized. While 0.0 0.5 l<0 1.5 2.0 2.5
(GRAIING
LLNG1IId (rnrri)
excellent cross-talk figures were obtained, it is con-
ceivable that the presence of substrate radiation Fig. 4. Angular bandwidth and the fanout density as a
modes from each signal carrier, generated by the inter- function of the grating interaction length.

present analysis. It can be seen that, for a given grat-
ing modulation index and a center wavelength of 632.8
nm, there is a decrease in the spectral bandwidth
(FWHM) with an increasing Bragg diffraction angle.
Alternatively, the diffraction efficiency is periodically
modulated, undergoing a transition between a maxi-
mum and a minimum value as the diffraction angle is
changed. Similar trends are observed at other center
wavelengths. We note that the diffraction efficiency
at all angles can be improved on by tuning the modula-
tion index during the fabrication process.
The dependence of the angular width and fanout
channel on the grating interaction length d is shown in
Fig. 4. Once again, a decrease in angular bandwidth
can be achieved, but it requires either an increase in
the grating interaction length or an increase in Bragg
angle. The spectral bandwidth of the device exhibits
a similar dependence. Hence, as the angular band-
width decreases, a greater number of fanout channels
can be accommodated within the waveguide. In com-
parison, the smaller interaction lengths (;560 ,um) of-
ten utilized in three-dimensional holographic
WD(D)M devices limit the overall channel density
that can be achieved.
In summary, a four-channel wavelength-division-
demultiplexing device has been fabricated upon local-
ly sensitized polymer microstructure waveguides with
the use of multiplexed waveguide holographic gratings
in DCG. Because the locally sensitized DCG region is
capable of supporting a large number of multiply ex-
posed phase gratings1 0 over relatively long interaction
April 1, 1990 / Vol. 15, No. 7 / OPTICS LETTERS 365
lengths, the WD(D)M device has the potential for
achieving large channel densities, with excellent angu-
lar and wavelength selectivities and low cross talk.
This research project was sponsored by Strategic
Defense Initiative Organization contract DASG60-89-
C-0053.
Michael R. Wang and G. J. Sonek are also with the
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California
92717.
References
1. W. J. Tomlinson, Appl. Opt. 16, 2180 (1977).
2. D. Botez and G. J. Herskowitz, Proc. IEEE 68, 689
(1980).
3. A. C. Livanos, A. Katzir, A. Yariv, and S. C. Hong, Appl.
Phys. Lett. 30, 519 (1977).
4. K. Wagatsuma, H. Sakaki, and S. Saito, IEEE J. Quan-
tum Electron. QE-15, 632 (1979).
5. J. D. Spear-Zino, R. R. Rice, J. K. Powers, D. A. Bryan,
P. G. Hall, E. A. Dalke, and W. R. Reed, Proc. Soc.
Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 239, 293 (1980).
6. T. Suhara, Y. Handa, H. Nishihara, and J. Koyama,
Appl. Phys. Lett. 40, 120 (1982).
7. R. T. Chen, M. R. Wang, and T. Jannson, Appl. Phys.
Lett. 56, 709 (1990).
8. R. T. Chen, W. Phillips, T. Jannson, and D. Pelka, Opt.
Lett. 14, 892 (1989).
9. H. Kogelnik, Bell Syst. Tech. J. 48, 2909 (1969).
10. T. Jannson and J. Jannson, Proc. IEEE 83, 84 (1988).